Heartless Bitches International's "nice guys" article

Rum apparently makes my woman ornery!

But for serious, people; she has a point. People who prey on our basic instincts ought to be bitch-slapped, and not just for the pleasure of doing so. The same misfortune awaits those on my side of the gender-line; that creature known as the "Professional Victim".

She waits, cloaked in borrowed grief, for the man who will fall for her tales of mistreatment and injustice. She sets her hook in such a man and feeds him her stories, and he promises that he will be "different".

He does not know. For to be her everything would try the patience of a saint, and this man is no saint. So he struggles for a while, trying his best...and eventually fails, casting said Professional Victim out of his life in a fit of frustration. And she moves on, adding his name to her roster of "bad boyfriends".

The next promises that he will be better than the last. See the pattern here?

In both genders there exists a group of people who have discovered the weakness of the opposite and are determined to prey upon it. "Nice Guys" are the male version, "Professional Victims" are their female equivalent.

Yeah, fuck those people. Why did I post this? For your own opinions, I've no time for speculation.

EDIT: My pagetopper is full of WIN!

edited 19th Mar '11 9:11:55 PM by drunkscriblerian

@Neo: Erm, what are the middle grounds between "asshole" and "decent guy"? And where have you seen people misinterpret "This guy was acting like a jerk" as "being a nice guy"?

edited 19th Mar '11 9:13:05 PM by DrunkGirlfriend

The bander ad just then was 'Why Do Women Fall For Jerks? Learn Dating Tip From A Pro"

edited 20th Mar '11 1:28:45 AM by joeyjojo

@DrunkGirlfriend: Does this answer your question?

Personally I think that once you see past through all that vitriol, the article somewhat has a point; No, you do not be nice to score chicks, you be nice for the sake of it. It's a basic thing you learn as kids, people  ^*

edited 20th Mar '11 1:59:24 AM by revertedtozero

Is there a trope for the flipside of Jerk with a Heart of Gold? Where some one seems nice but turns out to be a real tool? Is it Bitch in Sheep's Clothing?

edited 20th Mar '11 2:11:15 AM by joeyjojo

@411314:

To clarify: I meant that if you feel threatened by the word "loser" tossed around by completely anonymous folks on the internet at a generic "you" that might or might not apply to you personally - THEN you don't stand a chance. For as long as you think that it is about you, most probably it is.

To me a certain amount and form of "verbal abuse" is part of the game. I do it, she does it - we challenge each other, and it is bonding and erotic, as long as both parts know that it's a game. Sure there is some risk in that way of communicating - "no risk no fun" totally applies here.

Of course, this form of flirty communication, like communication in general, depends a lot on context and body language, which is why the internet is such a communication nightmare and a pretty bad ground for flirting.

ETA: Who talked about a girlfriend, anyway? ;-)

edited 20th Mar '11 2:15:03 AM by vijeno

"Erm, what are the middle grounds between "asshole" and "decent guy"?" - DG

You didn't just say "asshole" but were referring specifically to a manipulative, emotionally blackmailing kind of asshole. At the very least, different people equate the label "Nice Guy" with different traits, both positive and negative.

Again, you're oversimplifying this, and this kind of oversimplifying approach often throws off guys who form their opinions on dating from online conversations about it.

Learning about dating from conversations online is probably as productive as learning about sex from porn.

To be fair, I deliberately worded it that way to see if anyone would challenge it.

For what it's worth, I agree that the approach is somewhat flawed, but what's the alternative? Some of us aren't sure if we're ready for relationships, and don't know who to believe on dating-related subjects. What better approach to take, then, than to look at online discussions about them, and try to figure out which sides seem to be more rational?

It works as a template from which you must learn to improvise through practice, as with most things.

Also, it doesn't matter whether the "Nice Guy" is possibly well-intentioned but terribly misguided or a self-aware cad, the outcome remains the same for the gal that's the butt of his antics. The former Nice Guy needs a shrink while the latter needs the scorn heaped upon him until either he ceases his behaviour or he runs out of possible dudettes to exploit, and the first is more likely to happen than the second.

You're presupposing that having a discussion online is a baseless and pointless one simply because it's online. Never mind that there are actual people typing the words and posting them to a board, full of opinions and ideas themselves. The only thing we're missing is facial recognition, tone, and (possible) inflection. How in the world does that make this "less" of a discussion?

Neo, if someone's still confused about the point, then they need to find answers, otherwise they're an idiot. Someone's painting a bad picture of themselves when a simple discussion like this that reaches 15 pages, full of various opinions, can't be understood by said person, and proceeds to blame his/her confusion on everyone else because it's "too confusing". If they can't understand the basic procedures of understanding knowledge and getting information, especially in an age where information is extremely easy to come by, then I'd wager that they're far too socially inept to be in a relationship in the first place.

If there had to be a middle ground between being kind and being a Nice Guy, then I'd say it lies in the confusion of how you'd define yourself. I wasn't manipulative when I was young, but I was damn confused by all the signals I was putting out and getting from various women. But in truth, you either are being manipulative, or you aren't. Again, if you honestly don't know, or can't tell, then you may be too socially awkward to be with someone at the moment.

I thought you meant something like "as long as you feel threatened by women calling you "loser", you have no chance in romance". My mistake.

Can I ask an honest question here? I'm not trying to be inflammatory, but, why is this still being discussed?

I think the topic's just going in circles now. :|

^People are mad because they're Nice Guys and they don't get laid.

Whaaaaaaaaaaatever.

Well if you've got a better reason why this has been going on for 15 pages I'm all ears.

That was more along the lines of "regardless of whether or not you're right, this is still ridiculous."

Because the topic pertains to relationships, which(along with gender, religion and politics) is something everyone loves talking about(even if they pretend they get tired of the discussion, even if they conversation is just a retread).

I don't love talking about it. :/

But I'm not here to tell you all to stop, was just curious.

So I should get gone now.

Well some interesting view points.

What I basically came away from it is this. Some "Nice Guys" are not all that nice at all and neither are their female counterparts. The article seemed to be harping on the stero type of "nice guys" ie the folks who claim this but are not and choose to shift blame.

We could just easily shift to calling them deceitful manipulative bastards/bitches. There are however guys who are nice just rather awkward usually due to inexperience or additional factors.

In short we have learned nothing new that we all really should have known or did know all along and we are just arguing over the tone and impressions of the article.

Here is an idea I had for a movie. It starts out as a traditional fuffy Rom Com with a 'nice guy' as the lead trying to win over his childhood sweetheart using Zany Schemes. Then halfway through switches to a slasherflick/psychological thriller as we see the 'hero's' actions from the point of view of the girl he is stalking.

edited 20th Mar '11 6:29:58 PM by joeyjojo

Actually, there's already a movie like that, He Loves Me He Loves Me Not, although it's more a riff on the Manic Pixie Dreamgirl.

Oh I'll seen that! Good film. I never thought Audery Tautou could scare me

@41314

Yes, its a mental health issue, its a medical issue, not just a personal one, its why people with depression often need help from doctors.

It isn't if it is the only thing you are doing. Being nice to someone with depression can make them feel worse, which is why proffessional help is helpful.

It is if you continue to do things that harm yourself and those around you if you are insecure and not get help for it. And it does mean it is unoffensive, because if something is true then it can't offend people. Ofc then we come into the question of "truth" but in this instance I cannot see how you are NOT a loser if you are behaving as described in the article. Just because you have an excuse does not make what you are doing any more right.

It never says "you are worth anything" I think you are brigning this into the arguement. The problem is that you are not CHANGING these things, not just that they happen but that any opportunity to alter oneself is ignored in favour of doing what you do already.

edited 21st Mar '11 5:30:17 AM by JosefBugman

Well said.